HISTORICAL MINUTES OF THE REVOLUTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE SEVEN
UNITED PROVINCES, FROM THE DEATH OF WILLIAM II. TILL THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS.
1680-1815.
In some of the preceding pages, the principal events in the history of
the Seven United Provinces, till the death of William II, in 1680, have
been briefly mentioned: in the present chapter, we shall insert a
summary account of the revolutions of their government, till the present
time.
XIV. 1.
_William III._
1650-1702.
William III. was born after the death of William II. his father.
Immediately after that event, his mother claimed for him the
stadtholderate, and all the other dignities, pre-eminences, and rights,
which his father and grandfather had enjoyed; but, so great, at that
time, was the public jealousy of the ambitious views of the house of
Orange, that the States General would not even take her claims into
deliberation. A general assembly of the States was held in 1661. They
confirmed the Treaty of Union, of 1579; attributed to themselves, the
appointment of all civil and military offices; placed the army under the
authority of the provinces and municipalities, and invested the council
of state with the general direction of the military concerns of the
nation. A war with England, which was then governed by Cromwell, soon
followed; it was the commencement of the naval glory of the United
States. But the government was distracted by the contests and
dissensions between the republican and the Orange factions. The former
were headed by John de Witt. He possessed transcendent abilities, was a
true lover of his country, and, on every occasion, advised the wisest
measures. Some of the military operations of the States proving
unsuccessful, the Orange faction endeavoured to persuade the people,
that this reverse of fortune was owing to the want of a Stadtholder; and
exhorted them to confer this dignity on the young prince, to be
exercised, during his minority, by one of the family. This proposition
was successfully resisted by De Witt. Peace between England and the
United Provinces being concluded, Cromwell endeavoured to unite them to
England by a federative alliance; but they rejected the proposition. At
the suggestion of De Witt, the States of Holland passed an Act, by which
they bound themselves never to appoint the Prince of Orange, or any of
his descendants, to the office of Stadtholder, or Captain General; and
to prevent, to their utmost power, the other States from making such an
appointment. This measure displeased the other States. In 1665, the
office of Commander in Chief becoming vacant, the opposite party
endeavoured to procure it for one of the Orange family; this attempt
also proved abortive. In 1661 a war broke out between England,--which
was then governed by Charles II., and the United States; these displayed
in it, chiefly under the command of De Ruyter, prodigies of valour and
naval skill; the year 1667 was famous in their annals, by their fleet's
sailing up the river Thames, and burning the English fleet at Chatham.
The peace of Breda immediately followed.
[Sidenote: XIV. 1. William III.]
Still, the civil discord continued. The States of Holland renewed the
_Edict of Exclusion_, with the addition of a clause, that, whenever a
person should be invested, with the office of Captain, or Admiral
General, he should swear never to aspire to the office of Stadtholder,
and to refuse it, if it should be offered to him.
[Sidenote: CHAP. XIV 1650--1702.]
The year 1671 is remarkable for the league entered into by Louis XIV.
and Charles II. against the United States, and by their vigourous
resistance to it. The circumstances into which it drove the United
States, compelled them to appoint the Prince of Orange Captain General
and Admiral: he took the oath prescribed by the Perpetual Edict, not to
aspire to the stadtholderate, and to reject it, if offered. He was at
this time in his twenty-second year: he owed his elevation to the
critical situation in which the United States were then placed; but it
was also owing to the great prudence with which he had conducted himself
when fortune was opposed to him; and to the talents and application to
business which he then discovered.
At sea, the navy of the United States was generally successful. At land,
the arms of Lewis XIV. triumphed; he conquered Gueldres, Overyssell, and
the city and province of Utretcht. This maddened the populace. They
massacred John De Witt, and Cornelius De Witt, his brother, after having
subjected them to the cruellest tortures and the most brutal
indignities. To the indelible reproach of William III. he did not
interfere to prevent or stop these horrors. His measures for obtaining
the stadtholderate succeeded.
[Sidenote: XIV. 1. William III.]
On the 4th of July 1672, it was re-established in the person of William
III.; and all the dignities and rights enjoyed by his predecessors were
conferred upon him. These, in 1674, were made hereditary in his family.
His subsequent conduct is entitled, on many accounts, to the warmest
praise. The success of the United States at sea compelled Charles II. to
make peace with them, so that Lewis XIV. was their only enemy. The war
with him was terminated by the peace of Nimeguen in 1678. Ten years
after it, the Stadtholder, on the abdication of James II. became King of
England. In 1690, England, Spain, Austria, and the United Provinces,
entered into the Grand Alliance against France. The Duke of Savoy and
several Princes of Germany afterwards joined it. In general, the
proceedings of the confederacy were unsuccessful; the war was terminated
in 1697 by the peace of Ryswick. In 1700, the disputes on the succession
to the Spanish monarchy, in consequence of the death of Charles II. of
Spain, without issue, called the world again to arms. William III. died
in 1702.
XIV. 2.
_John William Count of Nassau Dietz_, 1702-1711; _William IV_.
1711-1751.
The government of William III. was generally displeasing to the United
States: they accused him of sacrificing them to the interests of his
English monarchy, and to the hatred which he always bore to the French.
He was also suspected, and not without reason, of a design to acquire
the independent sovereignty of the provinces. At first, his influence
within them was so great, that he was said to be King in the United
States, and Stadtholder in England; but it declined gradually; and an
attempt by him to obtain the succession to the stadtholderate for John
Friso, Prince of Nassau and Hereditary Stadtholder of Frizeland,
absolutely failed. He made, by his will, that prince his testamentary
heir.
Upon the decease of William III. a general wish to discontinue the
stadtholderate was expressed in most of the provinces; those of Holland,
Zealand, Utrecht, Gueldres, and Overyssell, came to a formal resolution
to this effect They recognised the supreme power of the States General,
and conferred the direction of their political concerns on Heinsius, the
actual Grand Pensionary, a person of great learning, uncommon talents
for business, and acknowledged integrity.
[Sidenote: XIV. 2. John William Count of Nassau Diets, 1702-1711;
William IV. 1711-1749.]
As testamentary heir of William III., John-William assumed the title of
Prince of Orange: he died in 1711, without having exercised the power of
the stadtholderate, except in the province of Frizeland.
The war of the succession terminated in 1713, by the peace of Utretcht:
it was succeeded in 1715 by the Barrier Treaty, and in 1719 by the
Quadruple Alliance, ever memorable for the triumphant campaigns of
Marlborough, by which it was followed. The pensionary Heinsius died in
1720. In his life-time, several weak attempts had been made, in
different provinces, to restore in them the stadtholderate. They
succeeded only at Gueldres; and even there, it was restored with great
limitations.
Upon the decease of Prince William-John, his rights and pretensions
descended to Prince William, his son. In 1733, he married Mary, the
daughter of George II. of England. This strengthened his cause; but the
general spirit of the United Provinces was so averse to the
Stadtholderate, that it was not till the invasion of Holland, by the
French, in 1747, that the prince's party judged it advisable to bring
forward his claim. At first they met with resistance, but finally
prevailed, and Prince William of Orange became the sole Stadtholder of
every province: until his time each of the provinces of Frizeland and
Groningen had its particular Stadtholder. The dignities of Captain
General and Admiral were also conferred on him; and, in addition to
these, some rights and privileges which no former Stadtholder had
enjoyed.
The reverses of the United Provinces continued, and the aggrandisement
of the Stadtholderate increased proportionally. As yet William IV. had
no male issue. In 1748, the Orange faction proposed that the
Stadtholderate should be declared hereditary; and that, in default of
males, females should be admitted into the succession. After some
opposition the measure was carried in all the provinces, except
Frizeland and Groningen. From this time the United Provinces ceased to
be a republic, and became a monarchy, limited by the antient usages and
institutions. William IV. died in 1749.
XIV. 3.
_From the Death of William IV. till the Erection of the Kingdom of the
Netherlands_.
1749-1815.
At the death of William IV. William, his son, and afterwards his
successor in the Stadtholderate, was an infant, in very tender years.
His mother was named by the states Governess of the United Provinces.
She appointed the Duke of Brunswick to the command of their armies;
thus, after all their exertions and sacrifices for liberty, the United
Provinces became subject to the government of an English princess and a
German prince; and an English party became predominant in their
politics; William V. married a princess of Prussia, and thus the Orange
party was strengthened by Prussian influence.
[Sidenote: XIV. 3. From the death of William IV. till the erection of
the Kingdom of the Netherlands.]
These opposite, and conflicting interests, filled every province, with
dissension; and, on some occasions, armed one body of citizens against
another. The English party, sided with the Orange faction; the French,
with the republicans. At first the latter prevailed; they led the states
into measures, which forced England to declare war against them. In
1782, they acknowledged the independence of the United States of
America. Still, the dissensions continued. After a long conflict, the
republican party acquired the ascendant; they suspended the Prince of
Orange from his functions, and filled all the principal places of trust
with their own adherents. But the Orange party soon rallied; the Duke of
Brunswick entered Holland at the head of a victorious army, and, in
1787, re-established the Stadtholderate.
[Sidenote: CHAP. XIV. 1749-1816.]
His victorious career, was soon terminated. In 1799, the revolutionary
army of France made themselves masters of the whole territory of the
United States; and established _The Batavian Republic_. It was
successively governed, but always under the overpowering controul of
France, by a Convention, a Directory, and a Consul, with the appellation
of Grand Pensionary. In 1806, even these forms of her antient government
were abolished; Napoleon sending Louis, one of his brothers, to reign
over the United Provinces, with the title and powers of royalty; but
with an intimation, that France was entitled to his first attentions and
a priority of duty. The demands of Napoleon for attentions and duties
were so exorbitant, that rather than be instrumental in the infliction
of the miseries which a compliance with them must occasion, Louis
resigned his throne. Napoleon then incorporated the United Provinces
into his empire, "as an alluvion," for such he termed them, "to the
Rivers of France." Scenes of the most grinding oppression followed: the
Batavians were relieved from it by the fall and abdication of Napoleon.
[Sidenote: XIV. 3. Establishment of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.]
Before this event, William V. died, leaving a son, called from his
pretensions to the stadtholderate, William VI. We have seen that, on the
death of the Emperor Charles V. all the seventeen provinces, composing
the Netherlands, devolved to Philip II. his son; the successful
defection of the Seven United Provinces has been mentioned; the ten
remaining provinces were afterwards transferred to the House of Austria,
and were inherited by the Emperor Joseph II. The French made an easy
conquest of them in an early stage of the Revolution.
We now reach the ultimate fate of both the divisions of the Netherlands.
The congress of Vienna, by an act of the 9th June 1815, created and
conferred upon this prince, THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS, consisting
of the seventeen provinces, and a portion of Luxemburgh. It is
confessedly the first among the kingdoms of the second order.
* * * * *
It was our wish to present our readers with a sketch of the literary
history of the Netherlands, during the period treated of in this
chapter; but after most diligent and extensive searches, both in the
British and foreign markets, we have not been able to discover materials
for it; persons of acknowledged learning, both in Germany and the
Netherlands, have assured us that no such history exists.
* * * * *
APPENDIX
I.
REFERRED TO IN PAGE 188.
SOME ACCOUNT OF THE FORMULARIES, CONFESSIONS OF FAITH, OR SYMBOLIC
BOOKS, OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC, GREEK, AND PRINCIPAL PROTESTANT CHURCHES.
The constitutions of the Roman Catholic, and Protestant Churches, differ
in nothing more, than in the following important points: The Catholic
Church, acknowledges the authority of the Scriptures, and, in addition
to them, a body of traditionary law. She receives both under the
authority, and with the interpretation of the Church, and believes that
the authority of the Church in receiving and interpreting them is
infallible. The Protestant Churches generally profess to acknowledge no
law but the Scriptures, no interpreter of the Scriptures, but the
understanding and conscience of the individual who peruses them.
That the Roman Catholic Church should propound a formulary of her faith,
enlarge this formulary from time to time, as further interpretation is
wanted, and enforce acquiscence in it by spiritual censures, is
consistent with _her_ principles. Whether such a pretension can be
avowed, without inconsistency, by any Protestant Church, has been a
subject of much discussion. In point of fact, however, no Protestant
Church is without her formulary, or abstains from enforcing it by
temporal provisions and spiritual censures. To enforce their formularies
by civil penalties, is inconsistent with the principles, of every
christian church. All churches howsoever have so enforced, and have
blamed the others, for so enforcing them.
Such formularies, from the circumstance of their collecting into one
instrument, several articles, of religious belief, are generally known
on the Continent, by the appellation of SYMBOLIC BOOKS.
I. The symbolic books, received by ALL TRINITARIAN CHRISTIAN
CHURCHES,--are,
1. _The Symbol of the Apostles_; and
2. _The Nicene Symbol_.
II. The symbolic books, received by the ROMAN CATHOLIC Church,--are,
1. The General Councils;
2. Among these,--_the Council of Trent_,--as immediately applying
to the controversies between the Catholic and Protestant Churches,
is particularly regarded;
3. _The Symbol of Pope Pius IV_.;
4. _The Catechism of the Council of Trent_.
III. The symbolic books of the GREEK CHURCH,--are,
1. _The Confession, of her true and sincere faith_, which, on the
taking of Constantinople, by Mahomet II, in 1453, Gennadius, its
patriarch, presented to the conqueror;
2. _The Orthodox Confession, of the Catholic and Apostolic Greek
Church_, published in 1642, by Mogilow, the Metropolitan of Kiow.
IV. The symbolic books of the LUTHERAN CHURCHES, are
1. _The Confession of Augsburgh_;
2. _The Apology of the Confession of Augsburgh_;
3. _The Articles of Smalcald_;
4. _And_, (in the opinion of some Lutheran Churches),--_The Form of
Concord_;
5. _The Saxon, Wirtenburgian, Suabian, Pomeranian, Mansfeldian,
Antwerpensian, and Copenhagen Confessions_, possess, in particular
places, the authority of Symbolic books:--the two first are
particularly respected.
V. The symbolic books of the REFORMED CHURCHES. The reformed Church, in
the largest extent of that expression, comprises all the religious
communities, which have separated from the Church of Rome. In this
sense, it is often used by English writers: but, having, soon after the
Reformation, been used by the French Protestants to describe their
church, which was Calvinistic, it became, insensibly, the appellation of
all Calvinistic churches on the Continent. The principal symbolic books
of these churches,--are,
1. _The Confession of the Helvetian Churches_;
2. _The Tetrapolitan Confession_,--signed by the four cities of
Strasburgh, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau;
3. _The Catechism of Heidelbergh_;
4. _The Gallic Confession of Faith_;
5. _The Belgic Confession of Faith_;
6. _The Canons of the Council of Dort_.
VI. The symbolic books of the WALDENSES,--are,
_Their original and reformed Creeds_.
VII. The symbolic books of the _Bohemians_,--are,
1. _The Confession of faith of the Calixtines and Taborites_,
signed at the Synod of Cuttenburgh in 1541;
2. _The Confession of the faith of the Bohemians_,--inserted in the
"Harmony of Confessions," published at Cambridge in 1680.
3. _The Consent of faith at Sendomer_.
VIII. The symbolic book of the ARMINIANS,--is
_The Declaration of the Remonstrants_, drawn up by Episcopius, and
signed in 1622.
IX. The symbolic book of the SOCINIANS is _The Catechism of Racow_;--the
best edition of it was published in 1609, reprinted at Frankfort, in
1739. An English translation of it has been published by Mr. Rees.
X. The UNITARIANS have no symbolic book. To Doctor Lardner's _Letter on
the Logos_ they shew universal respect.
XI. The symbolic books of THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND,--are,
1. _The Theological Oaths_,--containing a Declaration of the belief
of the Monarch's spiritual supremacy;--and Declarations against
Transubstantiation,--the invocation of Saints,--and the sacrifice
of the Mass;
2. _The Thirty-nine Articles_.
XII. The symbolic book of the ENGLISH AND SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIANS,--is
"_The Articles of Religion_ approved and passed by both Houses of
Parliament after advice had with an assembly of divines, called
together for that purpose." These were sent into Scotland, and
immediately sanctioned by the General Assembly, and Parliament of
that kingdom; and thus became a law of the Church and State.
XIII. The symbolic books of the Anabaptists may be said to be,--
THEIR SEVERAL CONFESSIONS OF FAITH:--Five were published at
Amsterdam, in 1675, in one volume 8vo.
XIV. The symbolic books of the Quakers,--are,
1. _Barclay's Catechism and Confession of Faith_, published in
1675;
2. His _Theses Theologicæ_;
3. His _Apology_,--a logical demonstration of the propositions in
the Theses. It was translated into almost every language and
presented to all the ministers assembled at Nimeguen;
4. But some persons assert that the real doctrines of the Quakers
are more easily discoverable from _The Christian Quaker and his
divine testimony, vindicated by Scripture reason and authorities
against the injurious attempts that have been lately made by
several adversaries_.--This work appeared in 1674; the first part
of it was written by Penn, the second by Whithead, one of his most
distinguished disciples.
XV. It may be added, that the symbolic book of the Jews,--is
_The Schelosch aikara ikkarim,--the Thirteen Articles of Faith_
framed by Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon in the 12th century: it is
frequently inserted in the Jewish prayer books. Sebastian Munster
published it with a Latin translation and an abridgment of the
History of Josephus, in one vol. 8vo. at Worms in 1529.
Many Christian Catechisms have been translated into Hebrew for the
benefit of the Jews.
* * * * *
An historical and literary account of all these Confessions of Faith,
and of several works and circumstances connected with them, is attempted
to be given, by the Author of these pages, in his "_Historical and
Literary Account of the Formularies, Confessions of Faith, and Symbolic
Books, of the Roman Catholic, Greek, and principal Protestant
Churches._"
THE SYLLOGE CONFESSIONUM printed at the Clarendon Press in 1804,
contains the _Professio Fidei Tridentinæ, Confessio Helvetica,
Augustana, Saxonica, Belgica_."
"The Harmony of the Confessions of the Faith of the Christian and
Reformed Churches" published at Cambridge in 1586, 8_vo_. attempts to
reconcile the Confession of Augsburgh, the Confession of the Four
Cities, the Confession of Bâsle, the first Confession of Helvetia; the
Confession of Saxony, the Confession of Wirtemburgh, the French
Confession, the English Confession, the latter Confession of Helvetia,
the Belgic Confession, and that of Bohemia.
On the general subject, _Walchius's Bibliotheca Theologica Selecta_, may
be usefully consulted.
APPENDIX II.
REFERRED TO IN PAGE 188.
ON THE REUNION OF CHRISTIANS.
The attempts, made at different times for the re-union of Christians,
are the subject of a learned and interesting work, published at Paris,
with the title of "_Histoire critique des projéts formés depuis trois
cents ans pour la Reunion des communions Chretiennes, par M. Tabaraud,
ancien Prétre de L'Oratoire, Paris_, 1824." An excellent sketch of these
attempts had been previously given by _Doctor Mosheim, in his
Ecclesiastical History, Cent. XVI. Ch. III. sect. 3. part 2. c. 1. and
Cent. XVII. Cha. I. sect. 2. p_. 1. To these publications the reader is
referred:--the present Essay may be found to contain,
I. A general view of the attempts made after the Reformation, to
unite the Lutheran and Calvinist churches:
II. Some account of the Attempts made at different times by the
sovereigns of France for the conversion of their protestant subjects:
III. The correspondence of Bossuet and Leibniz, under the auspices of
Lewis the Fourteenth, for the reunion of the Lutheran Churches to the
Church of Rome:
IV. Some account of an attempt made in the reign of George the First,
to reunite the Church of England to the Church of Rome:
V. And some general remarks on the Reunion of Christians.
I.
_Attempts made to unite the Lutheran, and Calvinist Churches._
The great division of Protestant Churches is, into the Lutheran, and
Calvinist communions. The Abbé Tabaraud relates in the work, which we
have just cited, not fewer than fifteen different attempts to effect a
reunion of their churches. In reading his account and that given by
Mosheim of these attempts, the writer thinks that, on each side, there
was something to commend and something to blame. It seems to him, that
the Lutherans deserve credit for the open and explicit manner, in which,
on these occasions, they propounded the tenets of their creed to the
Calvinists; that the conduct of the Calvinists was more liberal and
conciliating; but that, on the other hand, the conduct of the Lutherans
towards the Calvinists, was generally repulsive, and sometimes deserving
a much harsher name; while the conduct of the Calvinists, was sometimes
chargeable, with ambiguity.
"It was deplorable," says Mosheim, (Cent. xvii. sect. 2. part 2.
art. 3.) "to see two churches, which had discovered, an equal
degree of pious zeal, and fortitude, in throwing off the despotic
yoke of Rome, divided among themselves, and living in discords,
that were highly detrimental, to the interests of religion, and the
well-being of society. Hence, several eminent divines, and leading
men, both among the Lutherans, and Calvinists, sought anxiously,
after some method, of uniting the two churches, though divided in
their opinions, in the bonds of Christian charity, and
ecclesiastical communion. A competent knowledge, of human nature,
and human passions, was sufficient, to persuade these wise, and
pacific mediators, that a perfect uniformity in religious opinions,
was not practicable, and that it would be entirely extravagant, to
imagine that any of these communities, could ever be brought, to
embrace universally, and without limitation, the doctrines of the
other. They made it, therefore, their principal business, to
persuade those, whose spirits were inflamed with the heat of
controversy, that the points in debate between the two churches,
were not essential, to true religion;--that the fundamental
doctrines, of Christianity, were received, and professed, in both
communions; and that the difference of opinion, between the
contending parties, turned, either upon points of an abstruse, and
incomprehensible nature, or upon matters of indifference, which
neither tended, to make mankind wiser, or better, and in which the
interests of genuine piety, were in no wise concerned. Those, who
viewed things in this point of light, were obliged to acknowledge,
that the diversity of opinions, between the two churches, was by no
means, a sufficient reason, for their separation; and that of
consequence, they were called, by the dictates of that gospel,
which they both professed, to live, not only in the mutual
exercise, of Christian charity, but also to enter, into the
fraternal bonds, of church communion. The greatest part, of the
reformed doctors, seemed disposed, to acknowledge, that the errors
of the Lutherans, were not, of a momentous nature, nor of a
pernicious tendency; and that the fundamental doctrines of
Christianity, had not undergone, any remarkable alteration, in that
communion; and thus, on their side, an important step, was made,
towards peace, and union, between the two churches. But the
greatest part of the Lutheran doctors declared, that they could not
form, a like judgment, with respect, to the doctrine, of the
Reformed churches; they maintained tenaciously, the importance of
the points, which divided the two communions, and affirmed, that a
considerable part of the controversy turned upon the fundamental
principles, of all religion, and virtue. It is not at all
surprising, that this steadiness and constancy of the Lutherans,
was branded by the opposite party, with the epithets, of morose
obstinacy, supercilious arrogance, and such like odious
denominations. The Lutherans, were not behind hand with their
adversaries, in acrimony, of style; they recriminated with
vehemence, and charged their accusers with instances of misconduct,
different in kind, but equally condemnable. They reproached them
with having dealt disingenuously, by disguising, under ambiguous
expressions, the real doctrine of the Reformed churches; they
observed further, that their adversaries, notwithstanding their
consummate prudence and circumspection, gave plain proofs, on many
occasions, that their propensity to a reconciliation, between the
two churches, arose from views of private interest, rather than
from a zeal for the public good."
It is observable that Mosheim applies these observations to a late
stage of the reformation, when much of its first violence had subsided.
The nearest approach[080] to a reunion, between any Protestant
churches, seems to be that, which took place at Sendomer, in the year
1570.
II.
_Attempts for a Reunion of the Calvinist Churches to the See of Rome._
Having thus summarily noticed, the unsuccessful attempts, to effect an
union, between the Lutheran, and Calvinist churches, we proceed to a
similar summary mention of the attempts, equally unsuccessful, to effect
the reunion of the Calvinists, to the church of Rome, which were made,
1st, during the reign of Henry the Fourth:
2dly, during the reign of Lewis the Thirteenth: and
3dly, during the reign of Lewis the Fourteenth:
4thly, we shall afterwards notice, the Revocation of the edict of
Nantes, and the complete restoration of the protestants of France, to
their civil rights, in the reign of Lewis the Eighteenth.
II. 1.
An attempt to reunite the Calvinists to the church of Rome was made at
the celebrated Conference held at Poissi in 1561. In the work which we
have cited, the Abbé Tabaraud gives a short and clear account of this
conference. It failed of success, and a long civil war of religion
ensued. It was closed by the conversion of _Henry the Fourth_ to the
Roman Catholic religion. He was no sooner quietly seated on the throne,
than he conceived the arduous, but certainly noble project of pacifying
the religious contests of the world. It appears that he was induced to
entertain hopes of the success of this measure, by the assurances given
him by the Calvinist ministers, when his change of religion, was in
agitation, that salvation might be obtained in the church of Rome; and
from his expectation of finding a spirit of conciliation, and
concession, in the see of Rome.
"I have heard, from persons of distinction," says Grotius[081],
"that Henry the Fourth declared that he had great hopes of
procuring for the King of England, and the other protestant
princes, who were his allies, conditions, which they could not
honorably refuse, if they had any real wish of returning to the
unity of the church; and that he had once an intention of employing
bishops of his own kingdom on this project; but that this project
failed by his death."
It is said, that with these views he had sent for _Isaac Casaubon_, a
protestant divine of equal learning and moderation, and appointed him
his librarian; and that he intended confidentially employing him in
preparing means for the success of the measure, and smoothing the
obstacles which might impede its progress. Grotius[082] mentions, as a
saying of Casaubon, that "the catholics of France had a juster way of
thinking than the ministers of Charenton:" these were the most rigid of
the French Hugonot ministers. It is observable that the French
government always considered the Hugonots of a much more refractory
disposition than the Lutherans.
II. 2.
The pacific views of Henry the Fourth, were terminated by his decease.
The capture of la Rochelle by the arms of _Lewis the XIIIth_, was a
fatal blow to the political consequence of the Protestant party in
France. Cardinal Richelieu immediately set on foot a project, for the
general conversion, of the body: two persons, of very different
characters, were employed by him, in this measure; Father Joseph, a
capuchin friar, the confident, of all the cardinal's political and
private schemes, and Father P. Dulaurens, an oratorian, who lived in
retirement, wholly absorbed in the exercises of religion. They began
the work of reunion by holding frequent conferences, on an amicable
footing, with several of the protestant ministers; and it was resolved,
that, with the permission of the pope, and the authority of the king, an
assembly, should be convened, of ecclesiastics of each communion. Father
Dulaurens, recommended that the intended communications with the
ministers, should not take place, till they reached, the capital; but,
the cardinal, thought it more advisable, that the ministers, should be
separately informed, of the project, before they left the provinces. It
was accordingly communicated to them, and favourably received, by the
ministers, of Languedoc, and Normandy, but met with an unfavourable
reception, from the ministers of Sedan. It was resolved, that the
assembly, should meet, and begin their deliberations, with the
differences in the opinions, of the two churches, respecting the
Sacraments. Father Dulaurens recommended, that for some time, at least,
the Bible, even in the Calvinist version, of Olivétan, should be the
only book appealed to, on either side, as authority: but the Cardinal
insisted, on a resort to tradition. Grotius mentions that in several
articles, (as communion under both kinds, and the invocation of saints),
the Cardinal was willing, that concessions, should be made to the
Protestants; and suggested, that, as a medium, to reconcile them to the
Pope, a patriarchate should be established, in France, and he himself,
be the first patriarch[083].
Notwithstanding the general loftiness, and overbearing nature, of his
manners, it appears, particularly from M. de Rullhiêres[084] (6.) that
the Cardinal, acted on this occasion, with great moderation, and
recommended to his royal master, a similar line of moderation, in all
his conduct, towards his Protestant subjects.
II. 3.
The Cardinal's project, was suspended, by his decease; and resumed,
under _Lewis the Fourteenth_. In 1662, a plan, drawn up by M. le Blanc
de Beaulieu, a professor of Divinity, at Sedan, singularly esteemed,
both by the Roman Catholics, and Protestants, by which the essential
articles, in dispute, were reduced to a small number, was adopted, by
the Court, to serve as the basis of discussion. It was resolved, that
different synods of Protestant ministers, should be convened; that
these, should be composed, of ministers of known moderation, and pacific
views, and the articles, drawn up by M. le Blanc de Beaulieu, presented
to them. Three years were employed, in negotiations for effecting this
project: several ministers in the lower Languedoc, and the Isle of
France, expressed themselves, in terms favourable, to the measure, but
the synod of Charenton, took the alarm, and the project, was abandoned.
The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, a measure equally unwise, and
unjust, too soon followed. It is more to be attributed, to his ministers
and advisers, than to Lewis the Fourteenth himself. From the
_Eclaircissemens Historiques_ of M. de Rullhiêres, and the life of
Bossuet, by M. Baussét[085], it seems evident, that Lewis the
Fourteenth, had been induced, to believe, that the number of Protestants
was much smaller; that the conversions of them, would be much more
rapid, general, and sincere; and that the measures, for hastening their
conversion, would be much less violent than they really were. It is also
due, to the monarch, to add, that from the authors, whom we have cited,
it is evident, that when he began to perceive the true state, of the
transaction, though from false principles of honour, and policy, he
would not revoke the edict, he wished it not to be put into great
activity, and checked the forwardness, of the Intendants general in its
execution.
It is whimsical, (if on so serious a subject such a word may be used),
that the dragonâde, or employment of the dragoon troops, in forcing the
conversion, of the Hugonots, was owing to the wish of Louvois, the
minister, of Lewis the Fourteenth, to become himself, a missionary.
Observing how much the apparent success, of the missionaries,
recommended them, to Lewis the Fourteenth, he began to consider them as
dangerous rivals for the favour of his royal master, and determined,
therefore, to become himself, a principal performer. With this view, he
instituted the dragoon missions, and thus brought a material part, of
the work of conversion, into the war department.
II. 4.
The death of Lewis, and the known disposition of the Regent, appeared to
the Protestant party, in France, to afford a proper opportunity of
recovering their rights. Duclos, in his _Mémoires secréts sur les regnes
de Louis XIV. et de Louis XV_., says, that the Regent himself wished to
restore the Protestants, to their civil rights, but was dissuaded by his
council. Still, he seldom permitted the edicts against them to be
executed; and speaking generally, the Protestants seem to have suffered
no active persecution in any part of the reign of Lewis, the XVth. One
intolerable grievance, however, they unquestionably suffered in every
part of it. Their religious principles did not permit them to be married
by a Roman Catholic priest, in the manner prescribed by the law of the
state, and that law did not recognize the legal validity of a marriage,
celebrated in any other form. The consequence was, that in the eye of
the law, the marriage of Protestants was a mere concubinage, and the
offspring of it illegitimate. To his immortal honour, _Lewis the XVIth_,
by his edict of the 17th of November, 1787, accorded to all his
Non-catholic subjects the full and complete enjoyment of all the rights
of his Roman-catholic subjects. On a division in the Parliament, this
edict was registered by a majority of 96 votes against 16.
The persecution of the Hugonots in consequence of the revocation of the
Edict of Nantes, was condemned by the greatest men in France. M.
d'Aguesseau, the father of the celebrated chancellor, resigned his
office of Intendant of Languedoc rather than remain a witness of it: his
son repeatedly mentions it with abhorrence. Fénélon, Flechier, and
Bossuet,[086] confessedly the ornaments of the Gallican church, lamented
it. To the utmost of their power, they prevented the execution of the
edict, and lessened its severities, when they could not prevent them.
Most sincerely lamenting and condemning the outrages committed by the
Roman Catholics against the Protestants at Nismes, as violations of the
law of God and man, but doubting of the nature and extent, which some
have attributed to them, the writer of these pages begs leave to refer
to the sermon preached on them by the Reverend James Archer, a Roman
Catholic priest, and printed for Booker, in Bond-street, by the desire
of two Roman Catholic congregations, as expressing the doctrine of the
Roman Catholic church, and of all real christians on heretics and the
persecution of heretics.
III.
_The Correspondence of Bossuet and Leibniz, under the auspices of Lewis
the XIVth, for the Reunion of the Lutheran Protestants to the Roman
Catholic Church._
This correspondence forms one of the most interesting events in the life
of Bossuet; the letters, of which it consists, and the other written
documents, which relate to it, are highly interesting. We shall attempt
to present our readers with a short account--
1st. Of the circumstances which led to this correspondence;
2ndly. Of the Project of Reunion, delivered by Molanus, a Lutheran
Divine, and Bossuet's sentiments on that Project;
3dly. Of the intervention of Leibniz in the negotiation; and
4thly. Of the Project suggested by Bossuet, and the principal
reasons, by which he contended for its reception.
III. 1.
It appears that, towards the 17th century, the Emperor Leopold, and
several sovereign princes in Germany, conceived a project of re-uniting
the Roman Catholic and Lutheran churches. The Duke of Brunswick, who had
recently embraced the Roman Catholic religion, and published his _Fifty
Reasons for his conversion_, (once a popular work of controversy), and
the Duke of Hanover, the father of the first prince of the illustrious
house, which now fills the throne of England, were the original
promoters of the attempt. It was generally approved; and the mention of
it at the Diet of the Empire was favourably received. Some
communications upon it took place between the Emperor and the ducal
Princes: and with all their knowledge, several conferences were held
upon the subject, between certain distinguished Roman Catholic and
Protestant Divines. In these, the Bishop of Neustadt, and Molanus, the
Abbot of Lokkum, took the lead. The first had been consecrated Bishop of
Tina in Bosnia, then under the dominion of the Turks, with Ordinary
Jurisdiction over some parts of the Turkish territories. His conduct had
recommended him to Innocent the XIth, and that pope had directed him to
visit the Protestant states in Germany, and inform him of their actual
dispositions in respect to the Church of Rome. In consequence of this
mission, he became known to the Emperor, who appointed him to the See of
Neustadt, in the neighbourhood of Vienna. Molanus, was Director of the
Protestant Churches and Consistories of Hanover. Both were admirably
calculated for the office intended them, on this occasion. Each
possessed the confidence of his own party, and was esteemed by the
other; each was profoundly versed in the matters in dispute; each
possessed good sense, moderation, and conciliating manners; and each had
the success of the business at heart, with a fixed purpose, that
nothing, but a real difference on some essential article of doctrine,
should frustrate the project.
The effect of the first conferences was so promising, that the Emperor
and the two Princes resolved, that they should be conducted in a manner
more regular, and more likely to bring the object of them to a
conclusion. With this view, the business was formally entrusted by both
the princes to Molanus alone, and the Emperor published a rescript,
dated the 20th March, 1691, by which he gave the Bishop of Neustadt full
authority to treat, on all matters of religion, with the states,
communities, and individuals of the empire, reserving to the
ecclesiastical and imperial powers, their right to confirm the acts of
the Bishop, as they should judge adviseable. Under these auspicious
circumstances, the conference between the Bishop of Neustadt and Molanus
began.
But, before the events which we have mentioned took place, a
correspondence on the subject of a general reunion between Catholics and
Protestants had been carried on for some time, between Pelisson and
Leibniz. The former held a considerable rank among the French writers,
who adorned the reign of Lewis the Fourteenth; the latter was eminently
distinguished in the literary world. In the exact sciences, he was
inferior to Newton alone; in metaphysics, he had no superior; in general
learning, he had scarcely a rival. He had recommended himself to the
Brunswick family, by three volumes, which he had recently published, on
the Antiquities of that illustrious House; and was then engaged in the
investigation of its Italian descent, and early German shoots. The
result of it, under the title of _Origines Guelphicæ_, was published,
after his decease, by Scheidius, and is considered to be a perfect model
of genealogical history. He was also thoroughly conversant in the
theological disputes of the times; and in all the questions of dogma,
or history, which enter into them.
His correspondence with Pelisson, came to the knowledge of Louisa,
Princess Palatine, and Abbess of Maubrusson. She was a daughter of
Frederick, the Elector, and Count Palatine of the Rhine, and a sister,
of the Duchess of Hanover. In early life, she had been converted to the
Roman Catholic religion, and had the conversion of her sister, very much
at heart. With this view, she sent to her, the correspondence between
Leibniz and Pelisson, and received from her an account of what was
passing, between the Bishop of Neustadt, and Molanus. Both the ladies
were anxious, to promote the measure, and that Bossuet should take in
it, the leading part, on the side of the Catholics. This was mentioned
to Lewis the Fourteenth, and had his approbation. The Emperor and both
the Princes, by all of whom Bossuet, was personally esteemed, equally
approved of it, and it was finally settled that Bossuet and Leibniz,
should be joined, to the Bishops of Neustadt, and Molanus, and that the
correspondence with Bossuet, should pass through the hands of Madame de
Brinon, who acted, as secretary to the Abbess of Maubrusson, and is
celebrated, by the writers of the times, for her wit and dexterity in
business. Thus the matter assumed, a still more regular form, and much
was expected from the acknowledged talents, learning, and moderation of
the actors in it, and their patrons.
III. 2.
The conferences between the Bishop of Neustadt, and Molanus continued
for seven months, and ended in their agreeing on 12 articles, to serve
for the basis of the discussion, on the terms of the reunion.
The Bishop of Neustadt, communicated these articles to Bossuet. He
seems, to have approved of them generally, but to have thought, that
some alteration in them, was adviseable. This being mentioned to
Molanus, he published his _Cogitationes Privatæ_, a profound and
conciliating dissertation. Without entering into any discussion, on the
points in dispute, between the churches, he suggested in it a kind of
truce, during which, there should be ecclesiastical communion between
them: the Lutherans, were to acknowledge the Pope, as the first of
Bishops, in order, and dignity: the Church of Rome, was to receive the
Lutherans, as her children, without exacting from them, any retractation
of their alledged errors, or any renunciation, of the articles in their
creed, condemned by the Council of Trent. The anathemas of that council,
were to be suspended, and a general council was to be convened, in which
the Protestants were to have a deliberative voice: the sentence of that
council, was to be definitive, and, in the mean time, the members of
each party, were to treat the members of the other, as brethren, whose
errors, however great they might appear, were to be tolerated, from
motives of peace, and in consideration, of their engagements to abandon
them, if the council should pronounce against them. To show the
probability of a final accommodation, Molanus notices, in his
Dissertation, several points, in which one party imputed to the other
errors, not justly chargeable on them; several, on which they disputed,
merely for want of rightly understanding each other; and several, in
which the dispute was of words only.
It appears that the Bishop of Neustadt, communicated this dissertation,
to Bossuet, and that Bossuet was delighted, with the good sense,
candour, and true spirit of conciliation, which it displayed. In his
letters he frequently mentions the author, and always in terms, Of the
highest praise. His own language was equally moderate and conciliating.
"The Council of Trent," he says in one of his letters,
"is our stay; but we shall not use it to prejudice the cause. This
would be, to take for granted, what is in dispute between us. We
shall deal more fairly with our opponents. We shall make the
council serve, for a statement, and explanation, of our doctrines.
Thus, we shall come to an explanation, on those points, in which
either of us imputes to the other, what he does not believe, and in
which we dispute, only because we misconceive each other. This may
lead us far; for _the Abbot of Lokkum, has actually conciliated the
points so essential, of Justification, and the Eucharist: nothing
is wanting in him, on that side, but that he should be avowed. Why
should we not hope to conclude, in the same manner, disputes, less
difficult, and of less importance? Cela se peut pousser si avant,
que M. l'Abbé de Lokkum, a concilié, actuellement les points si
essentiels, de la justification, et du sacrifice de l'Eucharistie,
et il ne lui manque de ce coté la, que de se faire avouer. Pourquoi
ne pas espérer de finir, par les mêmes moyens, des disputes, moins
difficiles, et moins importantes?"_
With these rational and conciliatory dispositions, Bossuet, and Molanus,
proceeded. But, after this stage of the business, Molanus disappears,
and Leibniz comes on the scene.
III. 3.
A Letter, written by Bossuet to M^me de Brinon, having been communicated
by her to Leibniz, opened the correspondence between him and Bossuet. In
that letter, Bossuet declared explicitly, that the Church of Rome, was
ready, to make concessions, on points of discipline, and to explain
doctrines, but would make no concession in respect to defined articles
of faith; and, in particular, would make no such concession, in respect
to any which had been defined by the Council of Trent. Leibniz's Letter
to M^me de Brinon, in answer to this communication, is very important.
He expresses himself in these terms;
"The Bishop of Meaux says,
"1st. That the Project delivered to the Bishop of Neustadt, does not
appear to him quite sufficient;
"2dly. That it is, nevertheless, very useful, as every thing must
have its beginning:
"3dly. That Rome will never relax from any point of doctrine,
defined by the church, and cannot capitulate, in respect to any
such article;
"4thly. That the doctrine, defined in the Council of Trent, is
received in and out of France by all Roman Catholics;
"5thly, That satisfaction may be given to Protestants, in respect to
certain points of discipline, or in the way of explanation, and
that this had been already done in an useful manner, in some
points, mentioned in the Project of the Bishop of Neustadt.
"These are the material propositions, in the letter of the Bishop of
Meaux, and I believe all these propositions true. Neither the
Bishop of Neustadt, nor those who negotiated with them, make any
opposition to them. There is nothing in them, which is not
conformable to the sentiments of those persons. The third of them
in particular, which might be thought, an obstacle, to these
Projects of Accommodation, could not be unknown to them; one may
even say, that they built on it."
It seems difficult to deny, that, in this stage of the business, much
had been gained to the cause of reunion. The parties were come to a
complete understanding on the important articles of Justification, and
the Eucharist; and it was admitted, both by Leibniz, and Molanus, that,
in their view of the concern, an accommodation might be effected,
between the Roman Catholic, and Lutheran churches, though the former,
retained all her defined doctrines, and, in particular, all her
doctrines, defined by the Council of Trent. The question then was, what
should be done in respect to the remaining articles in difference
between the churches? It is to be wished, that it had been left to
Bossuet, and Molanus, to settle them, in the way of amicable
explanation, in which they had settled, the two important articles,
which we have mentioned. It is evident, from the passages, which we have
cited, from Bossuet, that it was his wish, that the business should
proceed on that plan, and that he had hopes of its success.
Unfortunately, the business took, another direction: Leibniz proclaimed,
that after every possible explanation should be given, the Lutheran
church would, still retain, some articles, contrary to the defined
doctrines, of the Church of Rome, and anathematized, by the Council of
Trent. To remove the final effect of this objection, Leibniz held out
Molanus's first project, that the Lutherans should express a general
acquiescence, in the authority of the church, and promise obedience, to
the decisions of a General Council, to be called, for the purpose of
pronouncing, on these points; and that, in consequence of these
advances, on their part, the anathemas of the Council of Trent, should
be suspended, and the Lutherans received, provisionally, within the
pale, of the Catholic church. To bring over Bossuet to this plan, he
exerted great eloquence, and displayed, no common learning.
III. 4.
But the eloquence, and learning, of Leibniz, were without effect. In
language, equally temperate and firm, Bossuet, adhered to his text,
that in matters of discipline, or any other matter, distinct from faith,
the Church of Rome, would show the utmost indulgence to the Lutherans;
but that, on articles of faith, and specifically, on those propounded by
the Council of Trent, there could be no compromise. This, however, he
confined to articles of faith alone: and even on articles of faith, he
wished to consult the feelings of Protestants, as much as possible. He
offered them every fair explanation of the tenets of the council; he
required from them no retractation, of their own tenets:
"Molanus," he says, "will not allow retractation to be mentioned.
It may be dispensed with; it will be sufficient, that the parties
acknowledge, the truth, by way of declaration or explanation. To
this, the Symbolical Books, give a clear opening, as appears by the
passages, which have been produced from them, and will appear, by
other passages, which may be produced from them."
If Bossuet was thus considerate, in what regarded faith, it will easily
be supposed, how indulgent his sentiments were, in respect to all, that
merely regarded discipline. A complete confession of faith, being once
obtained from the Lutherans, he was willing, to allow them, if they
required it, communion under both kinds; that their Bishops, should
retain their Sees; and that, where there was no Bishop, and the whole
body of the people, was Protestant, under the care, of a superintendant,
_that_ superintendant, should be consecrated their Bishop; that, where
there was a Catholic Bishop, and a considerable part of the diocese, was
Lutheran, the superintendant, should be consecrated priest, and invested
with rank, and office, that the Lutheran ministers, should be
consecrated priests; that provision should be made for their support;
that such of their bishops, and ministers, as were married, might
retain their wives, and that the consciences of those, who held
possessions of the church, should be quieted, except in respect, to
hospitals, whose possessions he thought, could not conscientiously be
withheld, from the poor objects of their foundations; and that every
other arrangement should be made, by the church and state, which would
be agreeable, to the feelings, and prejudices, of their new brethren.
Such were the advances made by Bossuet; and much discussion on them,
took place, between him, and Leibniz. It continued ten years. They are
very learned, and a scholar will read them with delight; but,
unfortunately, they rather retarded, than promoted, their object. The
real business ended, when Molanus quitted the scene. We shall close this
article, with the following extract from the last letter but one,
written by Bossuet, on the subject. It is addressed to Leibniz, and
bears date the 12th August, 1701, ten years, after his first letter, on
it was written:
"Among the divines of the Confession of Augsburg, I always placed
M. Molanus, in the first rank, as a man, whose learning, candour
and moderation made him one of the persons, the most capable I have
known, of advancing the NOBLE PROJECT OF REUNION. In a letter,
which I wrote to him some years ago, by the Count Balati, I assured
him, that, if he could obtain, the general consent of his party, to
what he calls, his Private Thoughts, _Cogitationes Privatæ_, I
promised myself, that, by joining to them, the remarks, which I
sent to him, on the Confession of Augsburg, and the other Symbolic
writings of the Protestants, the work of the Reunion would be
perfected, in all its most difficult and most essential points; so
that well disposed persons might, in a short time, bring it to a
conclusion."
The passage is so important, that it is proper to present it to the
reader in Bossuet's own words.
"Parmi les Théologiens de la Confession d'Ausbourg, j'ai toujours
mis, au premier rang, M. l'Abbé de Lokkum, comme un homme, dont le
sçavoir, la candeur, et la modération le rendolent un des plus
capables, que je connusse, pour avancer CE BEAU DESSEIN. Cela est
si véritable, que j'ai cru devoir assurer ce docte Abbé, dans la
réponse que je luis fis, il y a dejà, plusieurs années, par M. le
Comte Balati, que s'il pouvoit faire passer ce qu'il appelle ses
Pensées Particulières _Cogitationes Privatæ_, à un consentement
suffisent, je me promettois qu'en y joignant les remarques, que je
lui envoyois, sur la Confession d'Ausbourg, et les autres écrits
Symboliques des Protestans, l'ouvrage de la Réunion seroit achevé
dans ses parties les plus difficiles et les plus essentielles; en
sorte qu'il ne faudroit à des personnes bien disposées, que très
peu de tems pour la conclure[087]."
Dom. de Foris, the Benedictine Editor of the new edition of the works of
Bossuet and the Abbé Racine, _Abrégé de l'Histoire Ecclésiastique_[088]
are very severe in their censures of the conduct of Leibniz in the
negotiations for the Reunion, and attribute its failure to his
presumption and duplicity. To the writer of these pages, it appears
clear, that Leibniz was sincere in his wishes for the reunion; and that,
if he occasioned its failure, it was unintentionally. While the
business was in the hands of Bossuet, and Molanus, it was a treaty, not
for the reunion of the Roman Catholic church, and all Protestant
churches, but for the reunion of the Roman Catholic church, and the
Lutheran church; and to this, Molanus's endeavours to reconcile
differences, were directed. Leibniz, whose principles in religion, were
much wider, than those of Molanus, seems to have wished, that the
negotiation should be placed, on a broader basis, and extended to a
reunion of the church of Rome, with every denomination of Christians.
This gave the negotiation a different direction, and in a great measure,
undid what had been, so happily begun. We have seen, that, to the very
last, Bossuet, called out for Molanus, and entertained great hopes,
that, if the matter were left to Molanus, and him, the noble Project of
Reunion, would be crowned with success. There is no part of Bossuet's
literary or active life, in which he appears to greater advantage, or in
a more amiable light, than on this occasion.
IV.
_Attempt in the reign of Lewis the XV. to effect an union between the
Church of Rome and the Church of England._
Of all Protestant churches, the national church of England most nearly
resembles the church of Rome. It has retained much of the dogma, and
much of the discipline of Roman Catholics. Down to the sub-deacon it has
retained the whole of their hierarchy; and, like them, has its deans,
rural deans, chapters, prebends, archdeacons, rectors, and vicars; a
liturgy, taken in a great measure, from the Roman Catholic liturgy; and
composed like that, of Psalms, Canticles, the three creeds, litanies,
epistles, gospels, prayers, and responses. Both churches have the
sacraments of baptism, and the eucharist, the absolution of the sick,
the burial service, the sign of the cross in baptism, the reservation of
confirmation, and order to bishops, the difference of episcopal, and
sacerdotal dress, feasts, and fasts. Without adopting all the general
councils of the church of Rome, the church of England has adopted the
first four of them; and, without acknowledging the authority of the
other councils, or the authority of the early fathers, the English
divines of the established church, allow them to be entitled, to a high
degree of respect.[089] On the important article of the eucharist, the
language, of the Thirty-nine Articles, sounds very like, the doctrine of
the church of Rome.
At the time, of which we are speaking, the doctrines of the high church,
which are generally considered to incline to those of the Roman
Catholics, more than the doctrines of the low church, were in their
zenith; and in France, where the ultramontane principles on the power of
the Pope had always been discountenanced, the disputes of Jansenism were
supposed to reduce it very low. On each side, therefore, the time was
thought favourable to the project of Reunion.
It was also favourable to it, that, a few years before this time, an
event had taken place, which naturally tended to put both sides into
good humour.
On the occasion of the marriage of the Princess Christina of
Wolfenbuttell, a Lutheran, with the archduke of Austria, her court
consulted the faculty of theology of the University of Helmstadt, on
the question,
"Whether a Protestant Princess, destined to marry a catholic
prince, could, without wounding her conscience, embrace the Roman
Catholic religion?" The faculty replied, that, "it could not answer
the proposed question, in a solid manner, without having previously
decided, whether the catholics were, or were not engaged in errors,
that were fundamental, and opposed to salvation; or, (which was the
same thing), whether the state of the catholic church was such,
that persons might practise in it, the true worship of God, and
arrive at salvation." This question the divines of Helmstadt,
discussed at length; and concluded in these terms: "After having
shown, that the foundation of religion, subsists in the Roman
Catholic religion, so that a person may be orthodox in it, live
well in it, die well in it, and obtain salvation in it, the
discussion of the proposed question, is easy. We are, therefore, of
opinion, that the most Serene Princess of Wolfenbuttell, may, in
favour of her marriage, embrace the catholic religion."
This opinion is dated the 28th of April 1707, and was printed in the
same year at Cologne. The Journalists of Trevoux inserted both the
original and a French translation of it in their journal of May, 1708.
Under these circumstances, the correspondence in question took place. It
began, in 1718, through Doctor Beauvoir, chaplain to Lord Stair, his
Britannic majesty's ambassador at Paris. Some conversation, on the
reunion of the two churches, having taken place, between Doctor Dupin,
and him, he acquainted the archbishop of Canterbury, with the subject of
them. This communication, produced some compliments from the archbishop,
to Dr. Dupin, and these, led the latter, to address, to his grace, a
letter, in which he mentioned generally, that, on some points in
dispute, the supposed difference between the two communions was
reconcileable. The correspondence getting wind, Doctor Piers, pronounced
a discourse in the Sorbonne, in which he earnestly exhorted his
colleagues, to promote the reunion, by revising those articles, of
doctrine, and discipline, which protestants branded with the name of
papal tyranny; and contended, that, by proscribing the ultramontane
doctrines, the first step to the reunion would be made. The discourse,
was communicated to Dr. Wake: in his answer, he pressed Dr. Dupin, for a
more explicit declaration, on the leading points, in controversy.
In compliance with this requisition, Doctor Dupin drew up his
_Commonitorium_, and communicated it, to several persons of distinction,
both in the state, and church of France. He discussed in it, the
Thirty-nine Articles, as they regarded doctrine, morality, and
discipline. He insisted on the necessity of tradition, to interpret the
scriptures, and to establish the canonicity of the books, of the Old and
New Testament. He insisted on the infallibility, of the church, in
faith, and morals; he contended, that the sacrifice of the mass, was not
a simple sacrament, but a continuation of the sacrifice of the cross.
The word Transubstantiation, he seemed willing to give up, if the Roman
Catholic doctrine, intended to be expressed by it, were retained. He
proposed, that communion under both kinds, or under bread alone, should
be left, to the discretion of the different churches, and consented,
that persons in holy orders should retain their state, with such
provisions, as would place the validity of their ordination, beyond
exception. The marriage of priests, in the countries, in which such
marriages were allowed, and the recitation of the divine service in the
vulgar tongue, he allowed; and intimated that no difficulty would be
found in the ultimate settlement of the doctrine, respecting purgatory,
indulgences, the veneration of saints, relics, or images. He seems to
have thought, that the Pope can exercise, no immediate jurisdiction,
within the dioceses of bishops, and that his primacy invested him, with
no more than a general conservation, of the deposit of the faith, a
right to enforce, the observance of the sacred canons, and the general
maintenance of discipline. He allowed, in general terms, that there was
little substantially wrong, in the discipline of the Church of England;
he deprecated all discussion, on the original merit of reformation, and
he professed to see no use in the Pope's intervention, till the basis of
the negotiation, should be settled.
The answer of the archbishop, was not very explicit. It is evident from
it, that he thought, the quarrels on Jansenism, had alienated the
Jansenists and their adherents, from the Pope, much more, than they had
done, in reality. He was willing to concede, to the Pope, a primacy of
rank and honour, but would by no means allow him, a primacy of
jurisdiction, or any primacy, by divine right. On the other points, he
seemed to have thought, that they might come to an agreement, on what
they should declare, to be the fundamental doctrine of the churches, and
adopt, on every other point of doctrine, a general system, of christian
toleration.
The correspondence, which is very interesting, may be seen, in the last
volume of the English translation, of Doctor Mosheim's Ecclesiastical
History. To facilitate, the accomplishment of the object of it, Doctor
Courayer, published his celebrated treatise, on _the Validity of English
Ordinations_.
Both Dr. Wake, and Dr. Dupin. were censured, by the members of their
respective communions, for the parts, which they had taken, in this
business. Several rigid members of the English Church, and even some
foreign protestants, blamed Dr. Wake, for what they termed, his too
great concessions. In France, the worst of motives, were imputed to Dr.
Dupin, and his associates; they were accused, of making unjustifiable
sacrifices, in order to form an union, between the Jansenists, and the
members of the English Church. Even the regent, took the alarm: he
ordered Dr. Dupin, to discontinue the correspondence, and to leave all
the papers, respecting it, with the minister. This was done, but the
most important of them, have been printed, in the interesting and
extensively circulated publication, which has been mentioned.
V.
_Miscellaneous Remarks on the Reunion of Christians._
It does not appear, that subsequently to the communications, between
Archbishop Wake, and Dr. Dupin, any attempts for a general, or partial
reunion of christians, were made in the last century: but, early in the
present, _Napoleon_, conceived the project, of effecting, such a
reunion. He is said, to have particularly had in view, the
catholicizing, as it was termed, the northern part, of Germany. To
forward his design, many works were published: one of them, the _Essai
sur l'Unité des Cultes_, of M. Bonald, is written, with great ingenuity.
That Essay, and several others by the same author, were inserted in the
_Ambigu_ of Peltier, and deserve the attention, of every reader. Though
they contain some things, to which a Roman Catholic writer, would
object, they are evidently written, by a Roman Catholic pen.
The first point to be considered, by those, who meditate the project of
reunion, is, its practicability--those, who are disposed, to contend for
the affirmative, will observe, the number of important articles, of
Christian Faith, in which, all Christians, are agreed, and the
proportionally small number of those, in which, any Christians disagree.
All Christians believe,
1st. That there is one God;
2d. That he is a Being, of infinite perfection;
3d. That he directs all things, by his providence;
4th. That it is our duty to love him, with all our hearts, and our
neighbour, as ourselves;
5th. That it is our duty, to repent, of the sins we commit;
6th. That God, pardons the truly penitent;
7th. That there is a future state, of rewards, and punishments,
when all mankind shall be judged, according to their works;
8th. That God, sent his Son, into the world, to be its saviour, the
author of eternal salvation, to all, that obey him;
9th. That he is the true Messiah;
10th. That he taught, worked miracles, suffered, died, and rose
again, as is related in the four gospels;
11th. That he will hereafter, make a second appearance on the
earth, raise all mankind from the dead, judge the world in
righteousness, bestow eternal life on the virtuous, and punish the
workers of iniquity.
In the belief of these articles, all Christians, the Roman Catholic, all
the Oriental churches, all the members of the Church of England, all
Lutherans, Calvinists, Socinians, and Unitarians, are agreed. In
addition to these, each division, and subdivision of Christians, has its
own tenets. Now, let each settle among its own members, what are the
articles of belief, peculiar to them, which, in their cool deliberate
judgment, they consider as _absolutely necessary_ that a person should
believe, to be a member of the church of Christ; let these articles be
divested of all foreign matter, and expressed in perspicuous, exact, and
unequivocal terms; and, above all, let each distinction of Christians,
earnestly wish, to find an agreement, between themselves and their
fellow Christians:--the result of a discussion conducted on this plan,
would most assuredly be, to convince all Christians, that the essential
articles of religious credence, in which there is, a real difference
among Christians, are not so numerous, as the verbal disputes, and
extraneous matter, in which controversy is too often involved, make them
generally thought.
Still,--some articles will remain, the belief of which, one denomination
of Christians, will consider to be the obligation of every Christian,
and which other Christian denominations, will condemn. On some of those,
a _speedy_ reunion of Christians is not to be expected: but, to use the
language of Mr. _Vansittart_, in His excellent letter to the reverend
Dr. Marsh and John Coker, Esq.,
"There is an inferior degree of Reunion, more within our prospect,
and yet perhaps as perfect as human infirmity allows us to hope
for; wherein, though all differences of opinion, should not be
extinguished, yet they may be refined, from all party prejudices,
and interested views, so softened by the spirit of charity, and
mutual concession, and so controuled by agreement, on the leading
principles, and zeal, for the general interests of christianity,
that no sect, or persuasion, should be tempted to make religion,
subservient to secular views, or to employ political power, to the
prejudice of others.--The existence of Dissent, will, perhaps, be
inseparable from religious freedom, so long, as the mind of man, is
liable to error: but it is not unreasonable to hope, that
hostility, may cease, though perfect agreement, cannot be established.
IF WE CANNOT RECONCILE ALL OPINIONS, LET US RECONCILE ALL HEARTS."
These pages, cannot be closed better, than by these golden words!!!
FINIS.
* * * * *
FOOTNOTES.
[Footnote 001: Tom. xi. p. 1. 200.]
[Footnote 002: De Institutiones Clericorum, L. iii. c. xviii. &c.]
[Footnote 003: In his "Recueil des Ecrits pour servir d'eclaircissement
de l'histoire de France, 2 vol. Paris 1798."]
[Footnote 004: "Roswede, or Aroswethe, a nun in the monastery of
Gardersheim, lived in the reigns of Otho II. and III. towards the end of
the tenth century. She composed many works in prose and verse. In 1501,
some of her poems, on the Martyrdom of St. Denys, the Blessed Virgin,
St. Ann, &c. were printed at Nuremburgh. Her verses in praise of Otto
II. would be tolerable, if they were not Leonines: there are in them
some errors of prosody." Bib. Univers. et Histor. Vol. ii. p. 46.]
[Footnote 005: For a fuller account of Feudal and Civil Jurisprudence,
the writer of these pages begs leave to refer to his work, entitled,
"HORÆ JURIDICÆ SUBSECIVÆ, being a connected series of Notes respecting
the Geography, Chronology, and Literary History of the principal Codes
and original Documents of the Grecian, Roman, Feudal, and Canon Law." 1
vol. 8vo.]
[Footnote 006: It is entitled, "_Martiani Minei Felicis Capellæ
Carthaginiensis, Viri Procunsularis, Satyricon, in quo de Nuptiis
Philologiæ et Mecurii libri duo, & de septem artibus liberalibus libri
singulares. Omnes, et emendati et Notis sive Februis Hug. Grotii
illustrati. Ex Officina Plantiniana, Apud Christophorum Raphelingium
Academiæ Lugduno-Bat. Typographum_ M. D. C." [Transcriber's note:
Apostrophic date 1600] The Dedication to the Prince of Condé follows:
then, Encomiastic Verses by Scaliger, and Tiliabrogus. The two works are
then inserted, with an address to the reader, Errata, and Various
Readings. Afterwards, _Hugeiani Grotii Februa[007] in Satyricon Martiani
Capellæ:_ this contains his notes. They are preceded by an Engraving of
Grotius. Round it, is written, "_Anno_ M. D. C." [Transcriber's note:
Apostrophic date 1600] Hora Ruit.[008] Æt.xv. Under the engraving the
following verses are printed,
"_Quem sibi quindenis_ ASTRÆA _sacravit ab annis,
Talis,_ HUGEIANI GROTII _ora fero_."]
[Footnote 007: "Corrections"--or more literarily, "Purifications".]
[Footnote 008: These words were used by Grotius for his motto.]
[Footnote 009: Fabricii Bibliotheca Latina, Lib iii. c. 15. In 1794,
John Adam Goez published the "Treatise on the Marriage of Philology and
Mercury" separately, in a duodecimo volume: he mentions, in the preface,
an edition of it by Walthard. It is on the authority of Goez that we
have assigned the age of Capella to the third century: others place him
in a much later period.]
[Footnote 010: Montucla. Histoire des Mathematiques, Vol.ii. p.657.]
[Footnote 011: Vol. 9. p. 147. ii. 1.]
[Footnote 012: A similar exclusive claim in respect to the Indian seas,
under the grant of Pope Alexander VI., was set up by the Portuguese;
similar claims to the Ligustic and Adriatic seas, have been and still
continue to be made by the Genoese and Venetians. Those, who seek for
information on the subject, should consult the _Dissertation of
Bynkershook de Dominio Maris_, and note 61 to the recent edition of Sir
Edward Coke's Commentary upon Littleton.]
[Footnote 013: "Mais, dites vous, dans ce tems même, le jeune Pison
pouvolt avoir dix ans: Grotius faisoit bien des vers a cet âge. Je le
sçais, mais les Grotius sont ils bien commune! combien d'enfans
trouveres vous de dix ans, qui ayent nonseulement assez du feu pour
faire des vers, mais encore assez de jugement pour en juger sainement."
Gibbon's Posthumous Works, 8vo. vol. i. p. 520.--"Salmasius," says Mr.
Gibbon in another part of the same entertaining publication, (vol. v. p.
209), "had read as much as Grotius; but their different modes of reading
had made the one an enlighten'd philosopher; and the other, to speak
plainly, a pedant puffed up with an useless erudition."]
[Footnote 014: Bentivoglio, Histoire des Guerres de Flandres, l,
xxviii.]
[Footnote 015: _Bella plusquam civilia._ Lucan.]
[Footnote 016: Those who wish to obtain a clear, concise, and exact
notion of Calvinism and Arminianism, will usefully peruse the account of
them in Mr. Evans's "_Sketch of the Denominations of the Christian
World_." The thirteenth Edition is now before us, and we believe that it
has been often since reprinted.]
[Footnote 017: Mosheim's Ecc. Hist. Cent. xvi, ch. 2. § 3. part 2.]
[Footnote 018: Chalmer's Biographical Dictionary, Title "Arminius."]
[Footnote 019: A short and clear account of Arminianism is given by Le
Clere, in his Bibliotheque ancienne et moderne, Vol. II. Art. 3. p.
123.]
[Footnote 020: The best discussion of this subject, which has fallen
into the hands of the writer, is Bourduloué's Sermon _sur la
Predestination_.]
[Footnote 021: English Translation of Burigni's Life of Grotius, pp. 43,
44, 45.]
[Footnote 022: Vol. i.]
[Footnote 023: _Letters from and to Sir Dudley Carleton, during his
Embassy in Holland, from January 1615-16[**Modern presentation.] to
December 1620. London, 1757, p. 84_,--Sir Dudley Carleton's Letters
abound with harsh expressions respecting Grotius. The Editor of this
correspondence has inserted (p. 415) a letter from Grotius to Dr.
Lancelot Andrews, written from the Castle at Louvestein. "This letter,"
says the Editor, "which was never printed before, deserves a place here,
not only for its elegance and spirit, and its connection with the
subject of the work, but likewise in justice to the memory of the great
writer, as it contains his own justification of his conduct, which may
be compared with the less favourable accounts of it in the preceding
letters of Sir Dudley Carleton. The original is extant among the
manuscripts in the library of the late Sir Hans Sloane, bart. now part
of the British Museum."--"Utinam," says Grotius in this letter, "D.
Carleton mihi esset plus æquior; cui mitigando propinqui mei operam
dant. Sed partium, studia mire homines obcæcant."]
[Footnote 024: The history of this Synod, and of the whole controversy
upon Arminianism, is contained in Brand's _History of the Reformation_:
the account of the synod in these pages, is principally extracted from
the French abridgment of that work, in 3 volumes 8vo. The Calvinian
representation of the Arminian doctrines, and the proceedings of the
synod, may be seen in the late Mr. Scott's _Articles of the Synod of
Dort_, to which he has prefixed the History of the Events which _made
way for that Synod_: it is severely censured by Mr. James Nichols, in
his _Calvinism and Arminianism compared_. Introd. cxlii.
The Abridgment of Brand's History, was translated into the English
language and published in 1724-25[**Modern presentation.] by _M. de la
Roche_. He concludes his Preface to it by observing, that "No good man
can read the work without abhorring arbitrary power, and all manner of
persecution." The persecution of the Scottish Non-conformists by the
Episcopalians, and the persecution of the Remonstrants by the
Contra-Remonstrants, were attended with this enormity, that, in most
other instances, when one denomination of christians has persecuted
another, it has been on the ground that the errors of the sufferers were
impious, and led the maintainers of them to eternal perdition, and
therefore rendered these wholesome severities, as the persecutors term
them, a salutary infliction. But, when the Protestant Episcopalian
persecuted the Scottish Non-conformist, or the Contra-Remonstrant
persecuted the Remonstrant, he persecuted a Christian who agreed with
him in all which he himself deemed to be substantial articles of faith,
and differed from him only about rites and opinions, which he himself
allowed to be indifferent.--See Mr. Neale's just remark, Vol. II. ch.
vi.]
[Footnote 025: In 1765, Lord Hailes published a beautiful edition of
"The Works of the Ever-memorable Mr. John Hales of Eaton, then first
collected together," in three volumes, at Glasgow. It is to be lamented
that he did not accompany it with a full biographical account of Mr.
Hales.
"His biographers," says Mr. Chalmers, "all allow that he may be classed
among those divines who were afterwards called Latitudinarians." May he
not be termed the founder of that splendid school? Perceiving that the
minds of men required to be more liberally enlightened, and their
affections to be more powerfully engaged on the side of religion than
was formerly thought necessary, they set themselves, to use the language
of Bishop Burnet, "to raise those who conversed with them to another
sort of thoughts, and to consider the Christian religion as a doctrine
sent from God, both to elevate and to sweeten human nature. With this
view, they laboured chiefly to take men from being in parties from
narrow notions, and from fierceness about opinions. They also continued
to keep a good correspondence with those who differed from them in
opinion and allowed a great freedom both in philosophy and divinity."
(Burnet's History of his own Times. Vol. I. p. 261-268, oct. edit.)
Hales, Chillingworth, Taylor, Cudworth, Wilkins, Tillotson,
Stillingfleet, and Patrick, were among their brightest ornaments. They
were in some respects hostile to the Roman Catholics: _in hoc non
laudo_.--See the Writer's History of the English, Irish, and Scottish
Catholics. Vol. III. c. lxviii. sect. 1. 3d edition.]
[Footnote 026: "King James," says Mr. James Nichols, in his Calvinism
and Arminianism compared, p. 242, "sent a deputation of respectable
British divines, for the double and undisguised purpose of condemning
the Remonstrants, but especially Vórstius, (whom his Majesty had long
before exposed to the world as an arch-heretic), and of assisting the
Prince of Orange in his design of usurping the liberties of the United
Provinces, and assuming the supreme authority. The Elector Palatine sent
his Heidelberg divines for the same family purpose; and the Duke of
Bouillon employed all his influence with the chief pastors among the
French reformed."]
[Footnote 027: The words of the former are remarkable: "The errors of
public actions, if they be not very gross, are with less inconvenience
tolerated than amended. For the danger of alteration, of disgracing and
disabling authority, makes that the fortune of such proceeding admits of
no redress; but being howsoever well or ill done, they must ever after
be upheld. The most partial spectator of our synodal acts cannot but
confess, that, in the late discussion of the Remonstrants, with so much
choler and heat, there was a great oversight committed, and
that,--whether we respect our common profession of Christianity, 'quæ
nil nisi justum suadet et lene,' or the quality of this people, apt to
mutiny by reason of long liberty, and not having learned to be
imperiously commanded,--in which argument the clergy should not have
read their first lesson. The synod, therefore, to whom it is not now _in
integro_ to go back and rectify what is amiss, without disparagement,
must now go forward and leave events to God, and for the countenance of
their actions do the best they may." Letter to Sir Dudley Carleton, 11
January 1619.]
[Footnote 028: _Nichol's Calvinism and Arminianism compared_, Vol. II.
p.592]
[Footnote 029: _Decline and Fall_, Ch. LIV. towards the end.]
[Footnote 030: The writers who have given an account of the Synod of
Dort are mentioned by Fabricius, Bib. Græca, Vol. XI. p. 723. Some
useful observations upon the proceedings of the Synod may be found in
"Mr. Nichols's _Calvinism and Arminianism compared_." It is much to be
wished that the promised continuation of this work should speedily make
its appearance.
But no work upon this famous Synod deserves more attention than
"_Johannis Halesii, Historia Concilii Dordraceni, J. Laur. Moshemius
Theol. Doct. et P.P.C. ex Anglico Sermone latine vertit, variis
observationibus et Vitâ Halesii ausit. Accessit ejusdem de auctoritate
Concilii Dordraceni Paci Sacræ noxii, Consultatio. Hamburgi_, 8vo." M.
Le Clere's criticism on this work (_Bibliotheque ancienne et moderne_
Vol. 23, art. 4.) contains much valuable information upon the Synod, and
a summary of the life and writings of Mr. Hales.--Des Maizeaux published
a curious account of them in 1719.]
[Footnote 031: Pfaffii Hist. Literaria, vol. ii. p. 303.]
[Footnote 032: Burigni's Life of Grotius, lib. ii. sect. 12.]
[Footnote 033: Cent XVII, sect. 2, Part 2 (Note Y.)]
[Footnote 034: Mr. James Nicholls's Calvinism and Arminianism compared.
Vol. i. p. 597, 600, 634, 636.]
[Footnote 035: See Mr. Dugald Stewart's first Dissertation, sect. III.]
[Footnote 036: See Joannis Christopheri Locheri Dissertatio Epistolica
Historiam libelli Grotiani _De Veritate Religionis Christianæ_
complectens, 1725, in quarto; and the Journal de Scavans for the year
1724.]
[Footnote 037: See Nichols's Calvinism and Arminianism compared, vol. i.
p. 289.]
[Footnote 038: On the respect, which the Church of England considers to
be due to the writings of the early Fathers, see the excellent Appendix
to the Sermons of Dr. Jebb, the Right Reverend Bishop of Limerick.]
[Footnote 039: Vol. iii. L. 38. This letter merits a serious perusal.]
[Footnote 040: Dict. Historique, Preliminaire, p. xxix.]
[Footnote 041: Vol.1. p. 121]
[Footnote 042: Those, who will read his life, published by the writer of
these pages, with other Tracts, in 1819, will not, it is believed, think
this too strong an assertion. Is it not to be earnestly hoped, that in
the distress by which we are now visited, and the greater distress with
which we are threatened, many St. Vincents will appear?]
[Footnote 043: Mosheim's Ecc. Hist. ch. ii. sect. ii. part. ii. and
Bynkershock's Quest. Juris publici, lib. ii. ch. 18.]
[Footnote 044: Le Clerc, (Bib. Anc. et Mod. vol. xxiii. Art. iv.)
strenuously objects to this representation of Dr. Mosheim. "The
Arminians," he says, "have introduced no dogma as necessary to
salvation, which was unknown to the framers of their Confession of
Faith; neither have they retrenched from it, any article essential to
faith." He however observes, "that there are many ways of explaining
dogmas." Now, the same dogma explained in two ways, amounts to two
dogmas.]
[Footnote 045: See the third part of "_the last of Bossuet's Six
Addresses to the Protestants_," and the passages which he cites in it
from Jurieu.
For the actual state of Religious Doctrine, both in the Lutheran and
Reformed Churches of Germany, the reader may usefully consult, "_The
State of the Protestant Religion in Germany, in a series of Discourses
preached before the University of Cambridge, by the Rev. Hugh James
Rose, M.A. 8vo. 1825_;" and "_Entretiens Philosophiques sur la Re-union
des differens communions chretiens, par feu M. le Baron Starck, Ministre
Protestant, et premier predicateur, de la Cour de Hesse Darmstadt, &c.
8vo. 1818_;" and "_Tabaraud's Histoire des Re-unions des Chrêtiens._"]
[Footnote 046: Tom. XLVI. Art. 12. p. 208.]
[Footnote 047: Page 283.]
[Footnote 048: Page 284, 285.]
[Footnote 049: Page 286.]
[Footnote 050: Page 287.]
[Footnote 051: Page 288.]
[Footnote 052: Page 288.]
[Footnote 053: Page 291.]
[Footnote 054: Page 292.]
[Footnote 055: Page 293.]
[Footnote 056: Page 294.]
[Footnote 057: Page 296.]
[Footnote 058: Page 298.]
[Footnote 059: Page 299.]
[Footnote 060: Page 300. M. Le Clerc, (_Sentimens de quelques
Theologiens de Hollande, dix-septieme Lettre_) defends Grotius with
great ability against the charge of Socinianism: he justly observes,
that, his abstaining from unpleasing propositions, his silence on
offensive doctrines, and his conciliating expressions, should not too
easily be accounted proofs, of belief of his precise sentiments of any
particular tenets. Grotius, says Le Clerc, was like an arbitrator, who,
to bring to amity the parties in difference, recommends to each, that he
should give something of what he himself considers to be his strict
right.]
[Footnote 061: Ep. 363. p. 364]
[Footnote 062: Ep. 491. p. 195.]
[Footnote 063: Ep. 494. p. 896.]
[Footnote 064: Ep. 1706. p. 736.]
[Footnote 065: _Comparison of Calvinism and Arminianism_. vol. ii. p.
560.]
[Footnote 066: Ib. Vol. ii. p. 609.]
[Footnote 067: Ep. 1538. p. 573, 690, 926.]
[Footnote 068: Ep. 528. p. 400.]
[Footnote 069: "Those," says Mr. James Nichols,[070]
"who wish to behold the praises to which HUGO GROTIUS or HUGH DE
GROOT, is justly entitled, and which he has received in ample
measure from admiring friends and reluctant foes, may consult SIR
THOMAS POPE BLOUNT's _Censura celebriorum Authorum_. His well
earned reputation is founded on too durable a basis to be moved by
such petty attacks as those to which I have alluded in a previous
part of this introduction (p. xxi.), or those of Mr. Orme in page
641.
"That a man so accomplished, virtuous, fearless, and unfortunate,
should have had many enemies, among his contemporaries, is not
wonderful. But the number of those who evinced their hatred to him,
or to his philanthropic labours, increased after his decease, when
they could display it with impunity. 'This very pious, learned, and
judicious man,' says Dr. Hammond, 'hath of late, among many, fallen
under a very unhappy fate, being most unjustly calumniated,
sometimes as a SOCINIAN, sometimes as a PAPIST, and, as if he had
learnt to reconcile contradictions, sometimes _as both of them
together._'
"One cause of the Charge of SOCINIANISM being preferred against him,
has been already mentioned, (p. xxxiii.) and it is more fully
explained in pages 637, 642. The reader will not require many
additional reasons to convince him of the untenable ground for such
an accusation, when he is told that VOETIUS, one of the most
violent of his enemies, laid down this grand axiom--'To place the
principal part of religion in an _observance of Christ's commands
is_ RANK SOCIANISM!' To such a _practical observance of the_
requisitions of the Gospel, by what name soever it might be
stigmatized, Grotius pleaded guilty. He says (p. 637) 'I perceive
this was accounted the principal part of religion by the Christians
of the primitive ages; and their various assemblies, divines, and
martyrs taught, 'that the doctrines _necessary to be known_ are
exceedingly few, but that God forms his estimate of us from the
purpose and intention of an obedient spirit.' I am likewise of the
same opinion, and shall never repent of having maintained it.'
"But as the charge of POPERY is of the utmost consequence, I have
discussed this topic at great length, (pp. 566, 746), and have
proved (pp. 549, 561), that Grotius was as little attached to the
principles or the practice of the Romish church as the most zealous
of his accusers. Whatever tends to vindicate the conduct of Grotius
in this matter, will operate still more powerfully in favour of
Archbishop Laud. The design of Grotius is well described by Dr.
Hammond, in a _Digression_ which he added to his _Answer_ to the
_Animadversions on his Dissertations_; in which he says,
"'For the charge of Popery that is fallen upon him, it is evident
from whence that flows,--either from his _profest opposition to
many doctrines of some Reformers, Zuinglius and Calvin, &c_. or
from his _Annotations on Cassander, and the Debates with Rivet
consequent thereto, the Votum pro pace and Discussio_.'
"For the former of these, it is sufficiently known what contests
there were, and at length how profest the divisions betwixt the
Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants; and it is confessed that he
maintained (all his time) the Remonstrants party, vindicating it
from all charge, whether of Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism, which
was by the opposers objected to it, and pressing the favourers of
the doctrine of Irrespective Decrees with the odious consequences
of making God the _author and favourer of sin_, and frequently
expressing his sense of the evil influences that some of those
doctrines were experimented to have on men's lives. And by these
means it is not strange that he should fall under great displeasure
from those who, having espoused the opinion of Irrespective
Decrees, did not only publish it as the THE TRUTH and TRUTH OF GOD,
but farther asserted the questioning of it to be injurious to God's
free grace and his Eternal Election, and consequently retained no
ordinary patience for or charity to opposers. But, then, still this
is no medium to to infer that charge. The doctrines which he thus
maintained were neither branches nor characters of Popery, but
asserted by some of the first and most learned and pious Reformers.
Witness the writings of Hemingius in his _Opuscula_, most of which
are on these subjects. Whereas on the contrary side, Zuinglius and
others, who maintained the rigid way of Irrespective Decrees, and
infused them into some of this nation of ours, are truly said, by
an excellent writer of ours, Dr. Jackson, to _have had it first
from some ancient Romish Schoolmen_, and so to have had as much or
more of that guilt adherent to them, as can be charged on their
opposers. So that from hence to found the jealousy, to affirm him a
papist because he was not a contra-remonstrant, is but the old
method of speaking all that is ill of those who differ from our
opinions on any thing; as the Dutchman in his rage calls his horse
an ARMINIAN, because he doth not not go as he would have him. And
this is all that can soberly be concluded from such suggestions,
that they are displeased and passionate that thus speak.
"As for the _Annotations on Cassander_, &c. and the consequent
vindications of himself against _Rivet_, those have with some
colour been deemed more favourable toward Popery; but yet I suppose
will be capable of benign interpretations, if they be read with
these few cautions or remembrances:
"_First_. That they were designed to shew a way to peace whensoever
men's minds on both sides should be piously affected to it.
"_Secondly_. That he did not hope for this temper in his age, the
humour on both sides being so turgent, and extremely contrary to
it, and the controversy debated on both sides by those 'who,' saith
he, '_desire to eternize, and not to compose contentions_,' and
therefore makes his appeal to posterity, when this paroxysm shall
be over.
"_Thirdly_. That for the chief usurpations of the papacy; he leaves
it to Christian princes to join together to vindicate their own
rights, and reduce the Pope _ad Canones_, to that temper, which the
ancient canons allow and require of him; and if that will not be
done, to reform every one in their own dominions.
"_Fourthly_. That what he saith in favour of some Popish doctrines,
above what some other learned Protestants have said, is not so much
by way of _assertion_ or _justification_ of them, as to shew what
reasons they may justly be thought to proceed upon, and so not to
be go irrational or impious as they are ordinarily accounted; and
this only in order to the peace of the christian world, that we may
have as much charity to others and not as high animosities, live
with all men as sweetly and amicably, and peaceably, and not as
bitterly as is possible, accounting the wars and seditions, and
divisions and rebellions, that are raised and managed upon the
account of religion, far greater and more scandalous unchristian
evils, than are the errors of some Romish doctrines, especially as
they are maintained by the more sober and moderate men among them,
Cassander, Picherel, &c.
"_Fifthly_. What he saith in his _Discussio_, of a conjunction of
Protestants with those that adhere to the Bishop of Rome, is no
farther to be extended, than his words extend it. That there is not
any other visible way to the end there mentioned by him, of
acquiring or preserving universal unity. That this is to be done,
not crudely, by returning to them as they are, submitting our necks
to our former yokes, but by taking away at once the division, and
the causes of it, on which side soever; adding only in the third
place, that the bare primacy of the Bishop of Rome, _secundum
Canones_, such as the ancient canons allow of, (which hath nothing
of _supreme universal power_, or authority in it,) is none of those
causes, nor consequently necessary to be excluded in the [Greek:
diallaktikon], citing that as the confession of that excellent
person Philip Melancthon. So that in effect, that whole speech of
his which is so solemnly vouched by Mr. Knott, and looked on so
jealously by many of us, is no more than this, 'that such a Primacy
of the Bishop of Rome, as the ancient canons allowed him, were, for
so glorious an end as is the regaining the peace of christendom,
very reasonably to be afforded him, nay absolutely necessary to be
yielded him, whensoever any such catholic union shall be attempted,
which as it had been the express opinion of Melancthon, one of the
first and wisest Reformers, so it is far from any design of
establishing the usurpations of the Papacy, or any of their false
doctrines attending them, but only designed as an expedient for the
restoring the peace of the whole christian world, which every
disciple of Christ is so passionately required to contend and pray
for.'
"At the conclusion of the Doctor's _Continuation of the Defence of_ HUGO
GROTIUS, he thus expresses himself:
"'As this is an act of mere justice and charity to the dead,--and no
less to those who, by their sin of uncharitable thoughts towards
him, are likely to deprive themselves of the benefit of his
labours,--so is it but a proportionable return of debt and
gratitude to the signal value and kindness, which in his lifetime,
he constantly professed to pay to this church and nation,
expressing his opinion, "that of all churches in the world, it was
the most careful observer and transcriber of primitive antiquity,"
and more than intimating his desire to end his days in the bosom
and communion of our mother. Of this I want not store of witnesses,
which from time to time have heard it from his own mouth whilst he
was ambassador in France, and even in his return to Sweden,
immediately before his death; and for a real evidence of this
truth, it is no news to many, that, at the taking his journey from
Paris, he appointed his wife, whom he left behind, to resort to the
English Assembly at the Agent's house, which accordingly she is
known to have practised.'"]
[Footnote 070: Calvinism and Arminianism compared, Introduction,
cxxxii.]
[Footnote 071: A dialogue on the Reformation was also in the
contemplation of Mr. Gibbon: "I have," he says in the Memoirs of his
life and writings,[072] "sometimes thought of writing a dialogue of the
dead, in which Luther, Erasmus and Voltaire should mutually acknowledge
the danger of exposing an old superstition to the contempt of the blind
and fanatic multitude."]
[Footnote 072: Vol. i. p. 269, of the 8vo. edition of his works.]
[Footnote 073: A full account of the writings of _Wicelius_, and of his
projects of Pacification, is given by _Father Simon_ in the _Biblioteque
Critique, par M. de Sainjore_, Tom. ii. ch. 18. He concludes it, by
observing, that
"the great love which Wicelius had for the peace of the church,
might induce him to use expressions, somewhat harsh, but which
really ought not to be censured with too much rigour. It is evident
that his only view was to be useful to persons of his own time, to
whom he consecrated the latter part of his life.--I do not
recollect to have read that he was censured at Rome, and the
Spanish Inquisitors seem to have observed the same moderation in
his regard."]
[Footnote 074: XVI. Cent. Book V. p. 41, in the Englsh translation.]
[Footnote 075: See Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, Cent. XVII. ch. ii.
sect. ii. Part II.]
[Footnote 076: Eccles. Hist. Cent. XVI. ch. ii. sect. iii. Part. II.]
[Footnote 077: Observat. Hallen, 15 t. p. 341.]
[Footnote 078: It is a prayer addressed to Jesus Christ, and suited to
the condition of a dying person who builds his hope on the Mediator. _M.
Le Clerc_ has inserted it at length in the _Sentimens de quelques
Theologiens de Hollande_, 17 Lettre, p. 397.]
[Footnote 079: Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson, 2d Vol. p. 502. 2d
Edition.]
[Footnote 080: The author's "Confessions of Faith," mention this
convention, its dissolution, and the subsequent union of the Helvetian,
and Bohemian protestant congregations, in the Synods, held at Astrog, in
the years 1620, and 1627. The original settlement of these churches, was
in Bohemia, and Moravia. Persecution scattered the members of them: a
considerable number of the fugitives, settled at Herrenhut, a village in
Lusatia. There, under the protection and guidance of Count Zinzendorf,
they formed themselves into a new community, which was designed to
comprehend their actual and future congregations, under the title of
"_The Protestant Church of the Unitas Fratrum, or United Brethren of the
Confession of Augsburgh_." That Confession is their only symbolic book;
but they profess great esteem for the eighteen first chapters of the
Synodical Document of the church of Berne in 1532, as a declaration of
true Christian Doctrine. They also respect, the writings of Count
Zinzendorf, but do not consider themselves, bound by any opinion,
sentiment, or expression, which these contain. It is acknowledged, that,
towards the middle of the last century, they used in their devotional
exercises, particularly in their hymns, many expressions justly
censurable: but these have been corrected. They consider Lutherans and
Calvinists, to be their brethren in faith, as according with them in the
essential articles of religion; and therefore, when any of their members
reside at a distance from a congregation of the United Brethren, they
not only attend a Lutheran, or Calvinist church, but receive the
Sacrament, from its ministers, without scruple. In this, they profess to
act in conformity to the Convention at Sendomer. The union, which
prevails both among the congregations, and the individuals which compose
them, their modest and humble carriage, their moderation in lucrative
pursuits, the simplicity of their manners, their laborious industry,
their frugal habits, their ardent but mild piety, and their regular
discharge of all their spiritual observances, are universally
acknowledged and admired. Their charities are boundless, their kindness
to their poor brethren is most edifying; there is not among them a
beggar. The care, which they bestow, on the education of their children,
in forming their minds, chastening their hearts, and curbing their
imaginations,--particularly in those years,
"When youth, elate and gay,
Steps into life and follows, unrestrained,
Where passion leads, or reason points the way." _Lowth._
are universally acknowledged, universally admired, and deserve universal
imitation.
But, it is principally, by the extent and success of their missionary
labours, that they now engage, the attention of the public. These began,
in 1732. In 1812, they had thirty-three settlements, in heathen nations.
One hundred and thirty-seven missionaries, were employed in them: they
had baptized, twenty-seven thousand, four hundred converts: and such had
been their care, in admitting them to that sacred rite, and such their
assiduity, in cultivating a spirit of religion, among them, that
scarcely an individual, had been known, to relapse into paganism. All
travellers, who have visited their settlements, speak with wonder, and
praise, of the humility, the patient endurance of privation, and
hardship, the affectionate zeal, the mild, and persevering exertions of
the missionaries; and the innocence, industry and piety of the
converts:--the European, the American, the African, and the Asiatic
traveller speaks of them, in the same terms: and, that they speak
without exaggeration, the conduct both of the pastor, and the flock in
the different settlements of the United Brethren in England,
incontestibly proves. Whatever he may think of their religious tenets,
_Talis cum sitis, utinam nostri essetis_, must be the exclamation of
every christian, who considers their lives. Those, who desire further
knowledge of this amiable, and worthy denomination of Christians, will
find it in _David Cranz's ancient and modern History of the Brethren,
printed at Barby, 1771, and the two continuations of it, Barby_, 1791,
and 1804. The History has been translated into English; and is become
exceedingly scarce; the Continuations have not been translated. Mr. La
Trobe, the Pastor of the United Brethren in London, has published a
_Concise Historical Account of the Protestant Church of the United
Brethren adhering to the Confession of Augsburgh_.]
[Footnote 081: Epist. 1706, p. 736.]
[Footnote 082: Ib. Epist. 613.]
[Footnote 083: Epist. part. I. Epist. 432. part II. Epist. 53. The
French public strongly suspected the Cardinal of this design. It gave
rise to the celebrated libel, entitled "_Optatus Gallus,_" _Grotius_,
(Lit. 982.) notices a prophecy of Nostradamus, then in circulation:
"_Celui qui était bien avant dans le regne,
Ayant chat rouge, proche, hierarchie,
Apre et cruel, et se fera tant craindre,
Succedera, a sacrée Monarchie._"
If the event in question had happened, Nostradamus would have passed,
with many for a prophet.]
[Footnote 084: Eclaircissemens de l'édit de Nantes, page 1. c. 6.]
[Footnote 085: V. 2. p. 38, 148.]
[Footnote 086: We are grieved to add, that he allowed the _right_ of a
sovereign to persecute for religion.]
[Footnote 087: This article is extracted from Oeuvres Posthumes de
Bossuet, vol. i. Nouvelle édition des Oeuvres de Bossuet, vol. ii.
Leibnizii Opera, studio Ludovici Dutens, vol. i. and v. And the Pensées
de Leibniz, vol. ii. 8vo.]
[Footnote 088: Tom. xiii.]
[Footnote 089: See the Appendix to the Sermons of Dr. Jebb, the present
excellent Bishop of Limerick.--Cadel, 1824.]
* * * * *
Luke Hansard & Sons,
near Lincoln's-Inn Fields, London.
* * * * *
By the same Author,
THE LIFE OF ERASMUS:
WITH
HISTORICAL REMARKS ON THE STATE OF LITERATURE BETWEEN THE TENTH AND
SIXTEENTH CENTURIES.